Originally Posted by JMintzer (Post 2238749)

Oh, THOSE numbers you believe, but the numbers I cited are "inflated"? SMH...

Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 2237828)

You want data? How about 76% of violent crimes are committed by a demographic that is 12% of the population. I’ll continue to support our law enforcement officers, thank you

Originally Posted by Bill14564 (Post 2238647)

Absolutely. But using exaggerated statistics doesn't help the credibility of the argument and some of the attitudes expressed in this thread are counter to what this country is supposed to be all about. I have spent time in countries where *I* was the one who could be stopped and frisked for simply walking down the street - it's not where we should want this country to go.

In concept, stop and frisk might work. In practice, it seemed to use race alone as a "suspicious activity" and generated some ugly statistics. If we truly feel that, "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer," then we cannot accept a system that interferes with the rights of 10,000 citizens in order to remove weapons from 14 of them.

There has to be a way but I sure don't know what it is and I'm concerned that no one else has discovered it yet.

Originally Posted by JMintzer (Post 2238697)

Where is the exaggeration that 13% of the population commit about 50% of the homicides and 60% of the violent crimes?

(actually about 1/2 of that number, since the majority of the homicides/violent crimes are committed by males...)

Originally Posted by Bill14564 (Post 2238706)

I remember the numbers given as 76% and 12% but I haven't gone back to check. The actual numbers are surprisingly hard to find.

Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 2238730)

14 out of 10,000??? Talk about exaggerated statistics. Again, if most of the crimes were committed by purple Norwegians, stopping 10,000 of them would probably yield 8500+ violations. Stopping 10,000 80 year old white women would yield zero. Stop calling it racism. Stop making excuses for criminal behavior and whatever else the bicoastal elitist eggheads dream up and focus on catching the criminals and ideally changing the culture that nurtures them. The people who live in these slums want to be safe as well. Let’s help them out and frisk their kids

Originally Posted by Bill14564 (Post 2238736)

Yes, weapons recovered at a rate of 14 individuals for every 10,000 stops as reported in two sources. All citations, arrests, weapons, etc at a rate of 1,210 (I believe) out of every 10,000 stops.

I'm looking up violent crime statistics now and will find the sources for these numbers later.

*** Anyone else interested in helping with this research, please feel free

Originally Posted by JMintzer (Post 2238749)

Oh, THOSE numbers you believe, but the numbers I cited are "inflated"? SMH...

Originally Posted by Bill14564 (Post 2238789)

FBI crime statistics
US Census Bureau data

In 2019 (most recent data available):
White:

• 76% of population
• 46% of murders
• 59% of violent crime (rape, robbery, aggravated assault)
• 59% of combined (murder numbers are small compared to the rest)

Black:

• 13% of population
• 51% of murders
• 36% of violent crime
• 36% of combined

So 76% and 12% wasn't close, 50% and 13% was close for murders, and 30% and 18% was close for violent crime.

My stop and frisk numbers were not quite right. I can't find the article that told me 14 out of 10,000 but other articles don't agree. It appears the number should be 1.6% of stops resulted in seizure of weapons. 12% of stops resulted in an arrest of some sort, and 88% of the people stopped were completely innocent.

Then, out of every 10,000 searches:

• 160 individuals were carrying weapons
• 1,200 people were arrested
• 8,800 people were determined to be acting suspiciously and were stopped and searched and found to be innocent

Again, when we are talking about violating an individual's constitutional rights, if we truly feel that, "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer," then we cannot accept a system that interferes with the rights of 10,000 citizens in order to remove weapons from 160 of them.

Originally Posted by Bill14564 (Post 2238789)

FBI crime statistics
US Census Bureau data

In 2019 (most recent data available):
White:

• 76% of population
• 46% of murders
• 59% of violent crime (rape, robbery, aggravated assault)
• 59% of combined (murder numbers are small compared to the rest)

Black:

• 13% of population
• 51% of murders
• 36% of violent crime
• 36% of combined

So 76% and 12% wasn't close, 50% and 13% was close for murders, and 30% and 18% was close for violent crime.

My stop and frisk numbers were not quite right. I can't find the article that told me 14 out of 10,000 but other articles don't agree. It appears the number should be 1.6% of stops resulted in seizure of weapons. 12% of stops resulted in an arrest of some sort, and 88% of the people stopped were completely innocent.

Then, out of every 10,000 searches:

• 160 individuals were carrying weapons
• 1,200 people were arrested
• 8,800 people were determined to be acting suspiciously and were stopped and searched and found to be innocent

Again, when we are talking about violating an individual's constitutional rights, if we truly feel that, "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer," then we cannot accept a system that interferes with the rights of 10,000 citizens in order to remove weapons from 160 of them.

Originally Posted by Rainger99 (Post 2238858)

I think Blackstone meant that it was better to let ten guilty people go free rather than convict an innocent person.

This was at a time that England had more than 200 crimes where the punishment was death so a wrongful conviction had severe consequences.

I don’t think Blackstone was referring to stop and frisks as the penalty for stopping and frisking an innocent person does not have the same impact as executing an innocent person.

Originally Posted by Bill14564 (Post 2238860)

So just a minor violation of the constitution and then only in 88% of the cases.

We're not going to agree on this. Maybe we call it a glass 12% full and 88% empty situation.

My rights are protected by the same government that protects the rights of black people in the city. Those not committing crimes in the city are no less innocent, no less deserving of freedom than I am. If the government can find exceptions for taking away their rights today then there is nothing stopping the government from taking away my rights tomorrow - nothing.

Originally Posted by Bill14564 (Post 2238860)

So just a minor violation of the constitution and then only in 88% of the cases.

We're not going to agree on this. Maybe we call it a glass 12% full and 88% empty situation.

My rights are protected by the same government that protects the rights of black people in the city. Those not committing crimes in the city are no less innocent, no less deserving of freedom than I am. If the government can find exceptions for taking away their rights today then there is nothing stopping the government from taking away my rights tomorrow - nothing.

Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 2238902)

But it’s not a glass, it’s a stacked deck. Those 12% go on to commit heinous crimes and rack up a body count but you want to balance that with the 88% that are inconvenienced for 2 minutes. Sorry, this is not a level playing field. Do you think it is unfair if you are stopped for a broken taillight but the officer finds 10 kg of crack? Would you have your undies in a bunch if they only seized 10 kg from 1200 out of every 10,000 stops?

Originally Posted by Whitley (Post 2237467)

Growing up in NYC, I recall the foot patrol police. We would see the same officer after school each day. He was hurt in the line of duty and many of us (schoolkids) sent cards and even visited him when he was in rehab. School did not make us, parents didn't force us. He was just our cop friend. How times have changed.

Originally Posted by Bill14564 (Post 2238910)

If in those 10,000 stops for broken taillights it was found that 8,800 times there was no broken taillight then absolutely I would consider that unfair and would argue against it.

If the error rate of "acting suspiciously" is 88% then someone needs retraining on how to detect suspicious activity. I don't know what an acceptable error rate is but it ain't 88%!

Your characterization of it being just an inconvenience is meaningless until it is YOU who is stopped daily just for walking down the street. Perspectives change significantly when it is the observer who is "inconvenienced."

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 2238905)

Most violent crimes are committed by men. So let's just round up all the men, search and frisk, get search warrants to check their houses, take away their guns since clearly men are violent criminals whose purpose in life is to create problems for everyone else.

Also, MOST violent crimes committed in Kentucky, are committed by citizens of Kentucky. So let's just put walls up around Kentucky and let them Darwin themselves out of existence. Then we can take the walls down and more civilized people can move in and take over.

Furthermore, most black violent criminals do -not- have the name Jim-bob. So let's just mandate that all black women must from now on name their sons Jim-bob. That will surely solve the problem.

Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 2238917)

If they stopped me every day for just walking down the street and that saved even a single life, then I’d have no objections. I’d even buy the officers a donut and a cup of coffee. If I lived in a crime ridden white neighborhood and they stopped me just for being white, I’d thank them for their service. It’s only whiny grievance race mongers and bicoastal elitist eggheads supported by the biased media that drives this ridiculous narrative. You can’t decrease crime without targeting the criminals
Something tells me that there would be less objections if they targeted Wall Street investment bankers in 3 piece suits to search for cocaine